The possibility of future ownership – the reversion interests – may be transferred to a person or other entity by registering an act or other instrument of transmission in the public registers of the county in which the country is located. In real estate law, the term “return” (restitution or restitution of something in its former state) refers to the interest that a party gives to that estate at the expiration of an agreement. Generally, this refers to the reversible interest of the owner or free owner, to which a property returns when a lease expires. In most cases, a back-cutting clause is formulated in such a way that a rightful person of the purchaser is bound to the condition. However, as can be seen in the De Bondev Midrand question, such a right is personal and therefore subject to medical prescription, unless the clause is formulated in such a way that a rightful person of the executor can also enforce the law. In such a scenario, as it currently learns by law, the rights of reversion have no consequences – that is, the registered owner is required to build a dwelling within the allotted time and, if he does not build the dwelling within such a time frame, the executor is not entitled to a new transfer and, worse, the right to broadcast is prescribed after three years. No compensation is paid in case of automatic return or readmission. This may be quite acceptable if the initial transfer was an exclusively outdoor donation. However, if the initial transfer is a total or partial sale or the recipient is expected to install improvements in accordance with existing restrictions, the stock exchange may not be willing to accept the creation of a reverse interest rate that does not provide for the payment of compensation to the recipient of the return or exercise of the right of readmission. One method to meet this need for compensation is to replace a re-entry right with a purchase option. The purchase price could be the initial consideration, adjusted for a factor, compensation for the present value of the improvements, fair value or any other calculation that takes into account the reasonable expectations of the parties, without rewarding the beneficiary of the breach of the condition that triggers the right of withdrawal.
In principle, this bill is not in dispute. It is a bill that stems from the recommendations of the Commission. As indicated in the explanatory statement, the purpose of the legislation is to implement the recommendations of the Commission`s report on reversible leases under the Landlords and Tenants Act. I`ve had enough of this. However, on the concrete question of the impact of the Commission`s report, a number of points of detail must inevitably appear. In this regard, I frankly believe that the appropriate procedure in this case would be to refer this bill to a special committee. A right of reversion is a registered condition, recorded in a declaration of surrender, that the property in question is returned to the executor in the event of a reseed of a particular event or its non-accession.